------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~-->
Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page
http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/GSaulB/TM
--------------------------------------------------------------------~->
There are 13 messages in this issue.
Topics in this digest:
1. Re: [OT] English [dZ]
From: Steven Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
2. Re: [OT] English [dZ]
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
3. Re: Theory: Undechticaetiative?
From: Andreas Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
4. Re: [OT] English [dZ]
From: caeruleancentaur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
5. Re: [OT] English [dZ]
From: Steven Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
6. Re: Lenition or Elision or What?
From: Benct Philip Jonsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
7. Re: Lenition or Elision or What?
From: Thomas Hart Chappell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
8. Re: [OT] English [dZ]
From: Benct Philip Jonsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
9. Re: Agglutinativity Index (was: Re: What's a good isolating language
to look at)
From: Thomas Hart Chappell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
10. Re: Synthesis index of conlangs
From: Carsten Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
11. Re: Agglutinativity Index
From: Aidan Grey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
12. Re: Agglutinativity Index
From: Jim Henry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
13. Re: [OT] English [dZ]
From: John Vertical <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 20:11:20 +0100
From: Steven Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] English [dZ]
--- caeruleancentaur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> --- In [email protected], Tristan McLeay
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> >In the pre-Old English stage when /g/ most often
> had the realisation
> >[G], the geminate /gg/ was pronounced [gg]. This
> also had a palatal
> >form, [ddZ]. In Old English, [gg] and [ddZ] were
> spelt <cg>. You can
> >see this in words like "ridge" or "bridge", which
> in OE were _hrycg_
> >and _brycg_. I don't know what the German forms (or
> any other
> >Germanic lang) would be, but they'd probably have a
> /g/. In MnE,
> >because these are all word/syllable final (no
> geminates word initial
> >in pre-Old English), these are generally spelt with
> <dge> or the
> >like, not <j>.
>
> In German, "bridge" is "Brücke," and "ridge" is
> "Rücken."
Then we can set up a nice correspondence, if 'Mücke'
is etymologically related to 'midge'.
___________________________________________________________
Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 2
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 14:32:22 -0500
From: "Mark J. Reed" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] English [dZ]
On 12/10/05, Steven Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> --- caeruleancentaur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > In German, "bridge" is "Brücke," and "ridge" is
> > "Rücken."
>
> Then we can set up a nice correspondence, if 'Mücke'
> is etymologically related to 'midge'
No "if" about it; just ask m-w.com
(http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary?va=midge):
> Etymology: Middle English _migge_, from Old English _mycg_; akin to Old High
> German
> _mucka _ midge, Greek _myia_ fly, Latin _musca_
Funny how sound changes work. I never would have guessed that "midge"
and "mosquito" were cognate.
--
Mark J. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 3
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 20:52:46 +0100
From: Andreas Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Theory: Undechticaetiative?
Quoting Paul Bennett <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> On Sat, 10 Dec 2005 07:10:14 -0500, Andreas Johansson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > Since we've been speaking of dechticaetiativity lately, I was wondering
> > if there's a name for the opposite. Is there?
>
> The name for systems that treat O and DO the same, and IO differently is
> "dative". Confusing, but no more than using "ergative" as both a case name
> and a language type name.
On the plus side, "dative" is alot easier to spell than "dechticaetiative"!
Thanks.
Andreas
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 4
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 19:51:26 -0000
From: caeruleancentaur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] English [dZ]
--- caeruleancentaur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>
>> In German, "bridge" is "Brücke," and "ridge" is
>> "Rücken."
>--- In [email protected], Steven Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>wrote:
>Then we can set up a nice correspondence, if 'Mücke'
>is etymologically related to 'midge'.
I would suppose, then, that the German word for "fridge" is "Frücke."
:-)>
Charlie
http://wiki.frath.net/user:caeruleancentaur
___________________________________________________________
Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC:
http://messenger.yahoo.de
--- End forwarded message ---
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 5
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 21:18:04 +0100
From: Steven Williams <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] English [dZ]
--- caeruleancentaur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> >--- In [email protected], Steven Williams
> <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >wrote:
>
> >Then we can set up a nice correspondence, if
> 'Mücke' is etymologically related to 'midge'.
>
> I would suppose, then, that the German word for
> "fridge" is "Frücke."
> :-)>
HEY! That was gonna be _my_ joke! :)
(another case of 'great minds think alike')
___________________________________________________________
Telefonate ohne weitere Kosten vom PC zum PC: http://messenger.yahoo.de
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 6
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 20:38:46 +0100
From: Benct Philip Jonsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lenition or Elision or What?
R A Brown skrev:
>> Samprasarana' is alternation between glide and syllabic
>> forms of a vocoid.
>
>
> Not Greek this time - I assume it's Sanskrit. Yet another term not
> listed by Crystal in his 'dictionary'. But in any case this does not
> apply to the feature Charlie's Senjecan.
Indeed it is Sanskrit [EMAIL PROTECTED]@sA:[EMAIL PROTECTED]@]. Properly it
refers to when
a zero-grade like _sup_ may have a full grade like _svap_ rather
than _saup_. The Indic grammarians landed themselves in some
difficulties by taking the zero-grade rather than the full grade
as basic, so they had to "tag" zero-grade roots that didn't form
their full grade in the expected way.
--
/BP 8^)>
--
Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se
Solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant!
(Tacitus)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 7
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 15:53:36 -0500
From: Thomas Hart Chappell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Lenition or Elision or What?
According to some dictionaries, the difference between
synizesis and syn(a)eresis is, that synizesis does not form a diphthong,
but synaeresis or syneresis does.
http://www.bartleby.com/61/88/S0968800.html
http://www.bartleby.com/61/73/S0967300.html
Neither of them has to do with spelling.
They seem to be poetic terms, having to do with variant pronunciation;
pronouncing "seest" as [sist] instead of [sijest] would be synizesis;
pronouncing the "-dience" of "disobedience" as [djens] instead of [dijens]
would be syneresis. They are kinds of metaplasm, as are crasis and elision.
One dictionary has syneresis operating between the final vowel of a word
that ends in a vowel and the initial vowel of the next word which begins in
a vowel; it uses a different term, synaloepha, for the same kind of
phenomenon occurring word-internally. But
http://www.willamette.edu/~blong/Words/MetaplasmIII.html
has syneresis and synizesis both as subtypes of synaloepha.
---
Question;
When two words occur together, the first ending in a vowel and the second
beginning in a vowel, and the pronunciation of the vowels influences each
other, isn't that called "sandhi"? Wouldn't this "syneretic coalescence"
be a kind of "sandhi", then? I kept wondering why no-one brought
up "sandhi".
For that matter, why did no-one bring up "mutation"?
Perhaps neither word would have been adequate. But would neither word have
been appropriate at all? It seems to me they both would apply, even if not
well enough.
---
Tom H.C. in MI
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 8
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 20:49:20 +0100
From: Benct Philip Jonsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] English [dZ]
Mark J. Reed skrev:
> On 12/9/05, Mark J. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>>Was it just a spelling convention change? I thought that words which
>>previously had |j| began to be pronounced with |dZ|; they can't all be
>>reanalyzed spelling-pronunciations, can they?
>
>
> Ack. Wrong brackets. I mean [j] or /j/ and [dZ] or /dZ/, not |...|.
>
> --
> Mark J. Reed <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>
Those words which previously had /j/ are spelled |y| in Mod.Eng.
The sound /dZ/ occurred only post-vocally in Old English, the
modern spelling being |dg|. Except for a few cases of irregular
derivation from OE /tS/, like _jaw_, Mod.Eng. |j| for /dZ/ is
confined to French and Latin words. Obviously the Normans also
introduced a new way of pronouncing Latin!
--
/BP 8^)>
--
Benct Philip Jonsson -- melroch at melroch dot se
Solitudinem faciunt pacem appellant!
(Tacitus)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 9
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 17:00:18 -0500
From: Thomas Hart Chappell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Agglutinativity Index (was: Re: What's a good isolating language
to look at)
On Fri, 9 Dec 2005 01:15:37 -0500, John Quijada <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
>I'm not understanding something about this synthesis index. Do zero-marked
>morpheme values get counted when determining the index?
No.
If you were calculating a fusion index (average number of meanings per
morpheme), a "zero-morpheme" could introduce a fraction with a zero
denominator and a nonzero numerator, making the whole average infinite.
Also, the problem could come up:
Lion = Lion-MASC-SING
Lioness = Lion-FEM-SING
Lions = Lion-MASC-PLUR
Lionesses = Lion-FEM-PLUR
Is "Lion" Lion-0 or Lion-0-0? Is it 0, with MASC-SING fused, or 0-0, with
MASC and SING agglutinated?
Furthermore, for the synthesis index,
Lions = Lion-0-s because the 0-morph marks them as MASC
so "Lions" has three morphemes;
Lioness = Lion-ess-0 because the 0-morph marks her as SING
so "Lioness" has three morphemes;
Lion = Lion-0? or Lion-0-0? Does it have two morphemes? or three?
Anyway the average is between 2.75 and 3.00 morphemes per word, if we count
the zero morphemes.
So, it makes no sense to include the zero morphemes, either in the
synthesis index, or in the fusion index or agglutinativity index.
---
Read
http://scholar.google.com/scholar?q=author:"Pirkola"%
20intitle:"Morphological%20typology%20of%20languages%20for%20IR"
if you want;
I've printed it off, so I can read it.
Tom H.C. in MI
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 10
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 23:30:51 +0100
From: Carsten Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Synthesis index of conlangs
On Thu, 08 Dec 2005, 11:28 AM CET, Peter Bleackley wrote:
> Having done some quick stats on a sample of relay texts, I
> estimate the synthesis index of Khangaþyagon to be 2.59
>
> Number of morphemes Words
> 1 72
> 2 80
> 3 100
> 4 40
> 5 18
> 6 6
>
> Total 818 morphemes in 316 words.
>
> Pete
>
For Ayeri:
1) 47 words | an example text from the tutorial
2) 85 words | an example text from the tutorial
3) 86 words | The Northwind And The Sun
-----------
218 words
These 218 words contain
1) 105 morphemes
2) 174 morphemes
3) 192 morphemes
----------------
471 morphemes
That makes 2.16 morphemes per word. Valid.
Cheers,
Carsten
--
Keywords: morphemes_per_word, statistics
"Miranayam cepauarà naranoaris."
(Calvin nay Hobbes)
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 11
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 17:23:00 -0800
From: Aidan Grey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Agglutinativity Index
I didn't see this adressed, but I could be mistaken. I understand the synthesis
index. How do I determine an agglutinativity or fusion index?
Aidan
Thomas Hart Chappell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
So, it makes no sense to include the zero morphemes, either in the
synthesis index, or in the fusion index or agglutinativity index.
---------------------------------
Yahoo! Shopping
Find Great Deals on Holiday Gifts at Yahoo! Shopping
[This message contained attachments]
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 12
Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2005 21:05:09 -0500
From: Jim Henry <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: Agglutinativity Index
On 12/10/05, Aidan Grey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I didn't see this adressed, but I could be mistaken. I understand the
> synthesis index. How do I determine an agglutinativity or fusion index?
Count the number of junctures between morphemes.
Count the number of junctures that are agglutinative
rather than fusional. Divide the number of agglutinative
junctures by the total number of junctures to get
the index of agglutinativity; or, I suppose, the number
of fusional junctures by the total to get the index
of fusion.
How exactly one counts the fusional junctures, I'm
not quite sure. I think you look at whether one
or both morphemes on either side of the juncture
has variant forms and if so, it's fusional. That would
include both stem or affix altering because of
sandhi, and stem or affix simply having multiple
allophones, I think.
--
Jim Henry
http://www.pobox.com/~jimhenry
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 13
Date: Sun, 11 Dec 2005 15:21:43 +0200
From: John Vertical <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [OT] English [dZ]
Tristan McLeay wrote:
>So perhaps a more complete more summary summary:
Thanks aplenty - very informative!
However, this reminded me of another issue... (In case the continued
existence of this thread annoys someone, I can always take it off-list.)
>/j/:
>In "long u" (cute). In reflex of /ew/ (new).
My non-native dialect still keeps those two distinct (the former is /ju:/ or
/u:/ while the latter is /jy/ or /y:/), but are there any native dialects
left that would still separate those two??
Also, this has bothered me ever since I first read about the Great Vowel
Shift. Where DOES the "long u" come from? So pre-GVS /o:/ as in "loot" has
become MnE /u:/, pGVS /u:/ as in "loud" has become MnE /au/ and pGVS /eu/
(or was it already /iu/ by then?) as in "lewd" has become /ju:/. But what
about the /ju:/ in words like "lute"? They can't surely ALL be later
borrowings, re-spelt pGVS /o:/ or /eu/, or exceptions to the GVS. The only
explanation that makes some sense to me is that they used to be just /u/,
but lenghtened to /u:/ for whatever reason; but this doesn't explain where
the /j/ came from?? *confuzzled*
John Vertical
________________________________________________________________________
________________________________________________________________________
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yahoo! Groups Links
<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
http://groups.yahoo.com/group/conlang/
<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
